European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume 147, Issue 2 , Pages 173-177 , December 2009

Factors influencing delivery mode for nulliparous women with a singleton pregnancy and cephalic presentation during a 17-year period

  • Vimla Sharma

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Clinical Science Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway University Hospitals, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland
    • ,
  • Gabrielle Colleran

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Clinical Science Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway University Hospitals, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland
    • ,
  • Brendan Dineen

      Affiliations

    • Department of General Practice, Clinical Science Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway University Hospitals, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland
    • ,
  • Marie B. Hession

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Clinical Science Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway University Hospitals, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland
    • ,
  • Gloria Avalos

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Informatics and Medical Education, Clinical Science Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway University Hospitals, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland
    • ,
  • John J. Morrison

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Clinical Science Institute, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway University Hospitals, Newcastle Road, Galway, Ireland
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +353 91 493537; fax: +353 91 494561.

Received 8 January 2009 ,Revised 29 July 2009 ,Accepted 19 August 2009.

References 

  1. Heffner LJ, Elkin E, Fretts RC. Impact of labour induction, gestation age, and maternal age on caesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102:287–293
  2. Yeast JD, Jones A, Poskin M. Induction of Labour and the relationship to caesarean delivery: a review of 7001 consecutive inductions. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:628–633
  3. Traynor JD, Dooley SL, Seyb S, Wong CA, Shardon A. Is the management of epidural analgesia associated with an increased risk of caesarean delivery?. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1058–1062
  4. Liu S, Rusen ID, Joseph KS, et al. Recent trends in caesarean delivery rates and indications for caesarean delivery in Canada. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2004;26:735–742
  5. Joseph KS, Young DC, Dodds L, et al. Changes in maternal characteristics and obstetric practice and recent increase in primary caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102:791–800
  6. Druzin ML, Ll-Sayed YY. Caesarean delivery on maternal request: wise use of finite resources? A view from the trenches. Semin Perinatol. 2006;30(5):305–308
  7. Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Hiller JE, Haslam RR, Robinson JS. Birth after caesarean study—planned vaginal birth or planned elective caesarean for women at term with a single previous caesarean birth: protocol for a patient preference study and randomised trial. BMC Preg Childbirth. 2007;7(1):17
  8. Dodd JM, Crowther CA. Elective repeat caesarean section versus induction of Labour for women with a previous caesarean birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(4):CD004906
  9. Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Huertas E, Guise JM, Horey D. Planned elective repeat caesarean versus planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(4):CD004224
  10. Ecker JL, Chen KT, Cohen AP, Riley LE, Lieberman LS. Increased risk of caesarean delivery with advancing maternal age: indications and associated factors in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:883–887
  11. O’Leary CM, Klerk ND, Keogh J, et al. Trends in mode of delivery during 1984–2003: can they be explained by pregnancy and delivery complications?. BJOG. 2007;114:855–864
  12. Bailit JL, Schulkin J, Dawson NV. Risk-adjusted caesarean rates: what risk factors for caesarean delivery are important to practicing obstetricians?. J Reprod Med. 2007;52(3):194–198
  13. Patel RR, Peters TJ, Murphy DJ. Prenatal risk factors for caesarean section. Analyses of the ALSPAC cohort of 12,944 women in England. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(2):353–367
  14. Onwude JL, Rao S, Selo-Ojeme DO. Large babies and unplanned caesarean delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Rep Biol. 2005;118(1):36–39
  15. Cammu H, Martens G, Ruyssinck G, Amy JJ. Outcome after elective labour induction in nulliparous women: a matched cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(2):240–244
  16. Luthy DA, Maimgren JA, Zingheim RW. Caesarean delivery after elective induction in nulliparous women: the physician effect. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(5):1511–1515
  17. Liu EHC, Sia ATH. Rates of caesarean section and instrumental vaginal delivery in nulliparous women after low concentration epidural infusions or opiod analgesia: systemic review. BMJ. 2004;328:1410
  18. Anim-Somuah M, Smyth R, Howell C. Epidural versus non-epidural analgesia in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(4):CD000331
  19. Roberts CL, Algert CS, Douglas I, Tracy SK, Peat B. Trends in labour and birth interventions among low-risk women in New South Wales. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;42(2):176

PII: S0301-2115(09)00504-1

doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.08.015

European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume 147, Issue 2 , Pages 173-177 , December 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution